Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NoSQL (RDBMS)
Appearance
- NoSQL (RDBMS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While NoSQL is notable, this implementation of it is not — indeed the only non-WP:SPS is an unreliable blog post. Furthermore the article, by going into philosophy et al, is confusing for readers — as evidenced by unilateral moves being reverted by community consensus. -- samj inout 03:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Delete faisl WP:GNG and needs to be substantially clearer about how exactly it differs from other things with similar names. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 11:21, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Although I am no fan of this article, you seem to be overlooking the Linux Journal story. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:30, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'm unconvinced — this is merely a tutorial that does not give value judgment on the product or why it should be considered notable. Inclusion with its ill-conceived and conflicting name is going to cause more confusion for the vast majority of readers. Also, what's up with "RDBMS" in the title of a non-relational database? -- samj inout 11:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)